Added: 3 years ago
From: ROCKETBOOM
Views: 11,834
Sort by time | Sort by thread (beta)

Link to this comment:

Share to:
see all

All Comments (143)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • Creation makes so much more sense than this and people sound retarded when they try to explain evolution

  • this video is truly horrible in trying to explain evolution.

    either your trying to insult peoples intelligence or are just really really bad at making sense of things.

  • You child, have been thoroughly brainwashed. All evolution has to support it are known falsehoods. It is a disgusting lie perpetrated by the money elites to keep God's children from Him. There is no evidence to support the theory, let alone for it to be called a fact. I suggest you watch Kent Hovind, this brainwashing is reversible.

  • @musikmanea oh please calm down.....

    evolution isnt such a far fetched idea as some people like to assume, even more so the TREMENDOUS relation evolution has with genesis of the bible.

    i am christian, i believe in god and believe jesus christ to be the messiah, but what i ALSO believe in is evolution. youtube wont let me explain what i need to but im just going to say this, all that i have read in genesis, the different phrases and all, i can directly relate to the evolution of man.

  • where did the legs go?

  • creation makes more sense

  • but animals are less capable of psychological adaptions than humans, perhaps even completely incapable. even if the nifty defect came along, the whale would rather die.

    anyway: beached whales; regression?

  • Videos like this are one of the reasons creationists have misconceptions about evolution.

    And I thought "Know your meme" was bad (don't get me wrong, it is still really, really bad).

  • getting caught on some coral or any physically caused birth defect cannot be passed on genetically and so that whales offspring will not have a better chance of having a "nose on their head"

  • Wow. This is so horribly made that it has to have been made by a creationist.

    Try watching REAL educational videos - I favored many of the best.

  • Lamarckian inheritance was disproven a long time ago. Changes have to actually occur in DNA for them to be passed on.

    Otherwise, a mildly amusing video.

  • nope. u expect me to believe that evolution happened because a whale got bit or snagged on coral? no.

  • Ummm, what about us actually observing it? Through microevolution (which we have)? Which would lead to macroevolution. You're aware that viruses becoming drug-resistant is also strong evidence in favor of it, too, right?

  • This is a horrible video. It explains evolution about as bad as a creationist would try to.

  • This is a horrible video. It explains evolution about as bad as a creationist would try to.

    worth repeating

  • I felt the same way, I almost thought it was ridiculing the theory

  • was that about the dinosaw?

    No, think it was somrones birthday, well, anyway give the radiation back to nature, I would like to see this gripdinosawhawk after this stoneage.

    good hunting.

  • this video is rediculous mutations r never helpful and always hurtful or nuetral and neo-darwinism wasnt even darwins theory it was devries

  • Could you clarify what it is you're trying to say?

    No one will take your opinion seriously they can't understand you.

  • mutations are not always hurtful at all..

  • i didnt say they were always harmful

    i said they ethier hurt u or dont effect u

    but there has never been a mutation that helped u

  • "...mutations r never helpful..." That is not true. You are ignorant. Please go get a basic science education at a proper university...and I don't mean bible "school."

  • why do you call me ignorant do you even have any proof to back up what u r sayin

    Ohh and by technical terms, evolution is not science IT IS THEORY

  • Again, you show your complete ignorance of basic science. Yes, evolution is a "theory" just like atomic theory, gravitational theory and germ theory. Do you not believe in atoms, gravity or germs?

    You need to go to school and learn what a SCIENTIFIC THEORY means.

  • u still havent answered my question

    what is your proof

  • Proof? It's been proven to the point of over-kill. Go study science. You'll find all the evidence you'll ever need.

    It's not my job to teach you science. It's YOUR responsibility to get an education. You've already demonstrated the you don't even understand basic science terms. Go learn.

  • Let me put this in shorter words.

    Learn2Biology or STFU

  • @Jeremyguru I don't even know who you're talking to, buddy, but let me tell you this;

    Science, in terms used by the video, is a defect of the human mind. Science, your entire life, I presume, if you're a scientist, is nothing if not a series of complexeties applied, out of frustration, mind you, about topics we fail to comprehend.

  • @DuskRenegade No, that's not the definition of science. Do you just make shit up as you go?

  • @Jeremyguru Yes, I do. And I thought that sounded pretty neat. :)

  • im also talkin about the definition of true science

    that it must be repeatable,recordable, and tanjable

  • The theroy of evolution is a complete false premise that any creatures have ever evolved in the natural world in to other species or from other genus. It is the most ridiculous mass hysteria on the planet. How stupid is it to follow a belief and call it "science"?

  • The only problem with evolutionary theory is that you clearly don't understand it. Go get an education.

  • TO ALL RELIGIONS

    brothers and sisters- yeaH!

    OUR NATURE ON EARTH -no matter where it comes from-(since today i call it:UNAE)

    ->is our all god.

    Your gods know it.

    And they cry all day.

  • This video explains how Old Greg came about.

  • NERDS ALL OF YOU NERDS

  • i think she meant to dumb it down for the retarded fuckwit creationists inbread morons that believe in magic and all that

  • last point was the really good.

  • I like that Rocketboom wanted to make something in defense of evolution, but this is not a very good video. It downplays the amount of time most mutations take, downplays the incremental way those mutations are made, confuses evolution and abiogenesis, and chooses inaccurate and kind of ridiculous examples to make its point. Try it again, maybe.

  • It's better than Bible stories.

  • Pfft Bible stories OWNS.

  • Is she making fun of it?

  • Lamarck was thinking that physiological changes would be passed on. Genetics was not yet understood so they were making the best guess they could with the tools they had.

  • it comes down to probabilities, not certainties. I have type 1 diabetes. My kids are more likely than yours to also have it. If the mom also has diabetes, our kids are even more likely to have it.

  • NERD

  • "Genetic (deformities) are rarely passed on" Deny the big bang, abiogenesis, evolution, etc. all you want. But to say "deformities" are "rarely passed on" (and back it up with 'no 2 headed snakes') boggles my mind. Please read a Biology book. Please.

    ...You do realize that two headed snakes are in fact two snakes, no? Tell me that was a joke.

  • DNA has a mechanism that prevents most point mutations from being passed on. Natural selection, 'weeds out', harmful mutations over time. To be abopted, mutations must be instantly beneficial to survival. That isn't observed. Isn't tangible. But is the only hope of DEAD Neo-Darwinism. Which is the only hope of the God, ignorant

    materialist.

  • If you believe this, you've simply misunderstood the nature of DNA, evolution, natural selection, mutations and Neo-Darwinism.

    ps. sickle cell anemia

  • Sickle cell proves my rule also. It is naturally deselected from populations removed from epidemic malaria locations. In these single point diseases, modern medicine has interrupted natural selection. By

    allowing longer life of the victims, and encouraging their continued reproduction. However we don't see these single point mutations accumulating into new morphological

    characteristics. (super humans) Doesn't happen, the idea is a lame fairy tale.

  • hmm u know i thought evolution was supposed to be random

    and yet the very words "natural selection" means nature chooses

  • It's a misconception... MUTATION is random. Having a gene that makes animals faster won't mutate/exist sooner because it's useful, but if/when it DOES mutate, nature "chooses" it because that gene has an obvious advantage over "slow" genes. So that gene lives on in fast animals that reproduce because they have a higher fitness than slow ones. ("Fitness" in Biology)

  • you still said nature chooses

    youve just given it a mind

  • "you still said nature chooses

    youve just given it a mind "

    In case you aren't being obtuse on purpose, saying that "nature chooses feature X" is shorthand for "those individuals in a population that happen to have feature X, tend to leave behind more offspring than those without the feature X, and thus, in the following generations, a bigger and bigger proportion of the individuals will have the feature X, until having the feature X becomes the norm."

    Obviously no mind is involved in that.

  • "MUTATION is random"

    No it is not. Mutation is induced. It is called mutagenesis. This has been proven in the lad, while random mutation is just an after the fact rationalization.

  • "Factors in the environment are thought to influence the rate of mutation but are not generally thought to influence the direction of mutation. For example, exposure to harmful chemicals may increase the mutation rate, but will not cause more mutations that make the organism resistant to those chemicals. In this respect, mutations are random—whether a particular mutation happens or not is generally unrelated to how useful that mutation would be."

  • evolution[.]berkeley[.]edu/evo­site/evo101/IIIC1aRandom[.]sht­ml

  • Well. Reasoned.

  • coool

  • This was the first rocketboom I saw

  • I like rocketboom!

  • reupload?

  • A lot of people find evolution a difficult concept to grasp... it happens on such a huge time-scale that it's easier to accept 'intelligent design' rather than subtle mutations and selection pressure over millions of years. I think it's hard to picture a group of 12 things in your mind let alone, 100 or 1000 or 1000000!

  • Its not really a huge time-scale if you think about it.. Look what humans have done to dogs just over a few human generations.. We have formed them to our needs as we have with many other animals like cows and pigions..and thats has been done in a very short timespan.

  • True - but those are still the one species. Think about how long and how many mutations require a wing or... lungs. Boggles the mind.

  • 2:50=hawt.

  • this was the rocketboom episode that got me interested in the channel

  • if you like alien movies just watch the prophecy trailer. you`ll find it when you type in prophecy teaser 2. movie will come to theaters 2010.

  • I recently saw someone wearing jeans with no booty in them, AND no undergarments. Will they become whalelike too?  Or will their faded jeans just get ratty like mine and die a Goodwill-type death?

  • Dave, if their jeans are ratty their genes won't be going no where.

  • So instead of "the road to nowhwere" they have the genes to nowhere! I think I am beginning to gets it.

  • Well I know my genes are going nowhere.

  • No, I knew a girl in high school whose jeans were practically falling off the bone. I'm *sure* she's been knocked up by now.

  • PERVART

  • Best rocketboom ever.

  • the getting snagged on a coral bit is awful! its random fusion of gametes/crossing over/transposons/conjugation/p­hage DNA that cause this type of mutation! silly!!!

  • this smells like a rerun

  • I think she is trying to tell us that she is pregnant.

  • Accidental mutation is a tautology and a fairy tale. Evolutionary mutations, on the other hand, has been proven to be produced by the organism, reactively not by some improbable 1 in a trillion genetic mistake.

    Never such accidents have been observed, and in microbiology specific evolutionary or beneficial mutations can be induced in bacteria even without them reproducing, which is not to be mistaken with natural selection or, in other words, group formation.

  • How can it be a tautology and a fairy tale? tautologies are statements which are automatically true by their definition like "all triangles have three sides".

    and i am not too sure what you mean by "beneficial mutations can be induced in bacteria even without them reproducing, which is not to be mistaken with natural selection or, in other words, group formation." why would anyone mistake mutation with natural selection, and how is natural selection the same as group formation?

  • I mean an empty tautology as in circular reasoning dealing with consequence, not identity.

    As in for example, the sky is blue because the sea is blue, and the sea is blue because the sky is blue. The natural mutation selection theory uses the same flawed reasoning - an animal is fit because it is reproductively successful, and an animal is reproductively successful because it is fit.

    It doesn't answer what actually turns an animal fit. It is an after-the-fact rationalization.

  • I was talking about that bacteria have been observed to produce systematic beneficial mutations without any natural selection or reproduction.

    Such mutations are produced only when the organism needs them. Look up directed mutagenesis, it was discovered some years back.

  • By group formation I mean that animals are sorted into groups and survival by the natural selection of their traits.

  • Ok I have looked up "directed Mutagenesis" on wikipedia. very intruiging; it seems to imply that the genes somehow "know" what is needed. Which seems very strange.

    regarding "fit" and "reproductively successful" surely to a certain extent they both mean roughly the same thing; that by fit biologists mean a species that is good at surviving, and being good at surviving nessesarily entails being reproductively successful.

  • Oh it it groundbreaking material, I have some links to peer-reviewed scientific journals and papers on the issue if you want.

    Being fit does entail being reproductively successful but as one of the consequences of being fit, not the other way around. You see, being fit is the cause, and reproductive the effect. We are not talking about an identity here or that they refer to the same thing. That's why it is an empty tautology.

  • and i'm still not to sure about what you mean by group formation; surely a creature which has a trait which effects its chances of survival would be selected for or against by nature otherwise the trait wouldn't effect its survival.

    but i don't understand where the grouping comes into this. I suoppose you could group members of a species according to how probable they are to survive or according to whether they have specific traits or not, is that what you mean?

  • Group formation as in the formation of species and their ability to survive which is determined by natural selection of their traits (their relation with the environment and themselves).

  • ok that makes sense now.

    cheers!

  • I wanted to thank RocketBoom for subscribing to my channel on Youtube/PCWizKid . I appreciate your support.

    Cheers

    PCWizKid

  • Darwins b day is feb 12th. Not today. Is this an old video.

  • Joanna, I've got a "mutation" that goes on... and on... and on. Want to do some "reproducing"?

  • every post is a respot

  • repost*

  • Why is this the same as the last one?

  • this was a great post....or re-post w/e

  • Most of this video makes evolution look like a joke. I don't think that was the intent.

    I disagree with macroevolution, anyway.

  • Yeah, probably trying to explain it to four year olds with short attention spans.

  • First!

  • first where ? youre like 17

  • Is this a repost, I'm sure I've seen it...

  • I'm glad it was reposted! Best vid I've seen from 'Rocketboom' (only seen a few I must confess). Keep in mind whales n' stuff evolved over millions of years, & of course, variation is seldom sudden - I bet the noses gradually moved back - like how we used 2 have extra hands on the ends of our legs instead of feet :) Variation is beneficial 2 a species 'cuz makes 'em more adaptable 2 environments - thus there is also 'selection' 4 'variation' ~;D Same thing with death-turnover = adaptable =(

  • i'd love to see this proof of us having hands on our feet. man did they find the missing link or this all just speculation. let know hey is that why i like banana's.

  • there you all have my email now. hope this clears up my position.

  • Look down, clown =)

  • Darwin developed his theory over decades and he wasn't alone, Alfred Russel Wallace also had a similar theory. It turns out the theory actually predates Darwin. Darwin made observations while on his Beagle voyage that made evolution apparent and he spent much of the rest of his life on "on the origin of species". Try "seriously searching" the net for his book. Project Gutenberg has it.

  • I don't know how you can say there are no missing links...there are TONS of missing links. Where do you get your information? The most famous one probably being Archaeopteryx...or the Coelocanths...or the Dipnoi...or perhaps the Elpistostege....what about Ichthyostega?

    And that's just the tip of the iceberg.

  • so you've got a monkey to man direct link have you? i'd love to see it. whats the link?

  • Most of my education is in the zoology of non-human vertebrates, though my population genetics class provided pretty obvious evidence of the genetic relations between humans (Homo sapiens) with Homo habilis, Homo erectus, and Homo neanderthalis. It's hard to argue with DNA evidence, no? And even if there was no DNA evidence, why are my previously mentioned fossils discounted as evidence of macroevolution? Are you to suggest that everything else evolved while humans are somehow separate?

  • BTW I hope I'm not coming across as rude... it's not my intention..if you are religious or whatever then so be it..it's just that zoology and evolution are something I've spent a lot of time studying and so sometimes I act like it should be obvious to other people when perhaps they haven't actually been properly educated on the topic.

  • your not coming across as rude and i'm not i don't believe in god. i'm simply asking for proof of this so called evolutionary step. it's my understanding that it has never been found and therefore cannot be taken as this is what happened not this is what may have happened. i'm a scientist full stop but i don't like theories i like proff i don't understand why thats so hard to understand.

  • google is your friend, "evolution case study"

  • In scientific parlance a theory is the top of the chain. In isn't used the same way colloquially. Transitional fossils like the three-spine stickleback are rare due to Punctuated Equalibrium, Gould's theory.

    Also consider the transition from infant to adult. A photograph of a 5 year old looks much different than a 50 year old. Gradual changes make "transitional forms" a bit of a misnomer.

    Epistemologists shy away from calling anything "truth" due to pitfalls in human sense and understanding.

  • yeah man you hang onto that hand rail LMFAO

  • yes the genetic make up remains the same whats your point?

  • I didn't say anything of the sort.

  • Look up "theory" in respect to science... A theory is a model to explain truth.

  • dictionary meaning.

    "theory Definition"

    a speculative idea or plan as to how something might be done

    a systematic statement of principles involved the theory of equations in mathematics

    a formulation of apparent relationships or underlying principles of certain observed phenomena which has been verified to SOME degree

    that branch of an art or science consisting in a knowledge of its principles and methods rather than in its PRACTISE; pure, as opposed to applied, science, etc.

    NO TRUTH THEN

  • planexzeropoint if you think that random mutation is just a bad hypothesis for evolution ok but an actual scientific theory is an explanation of the facts.

  • Yea... it comes from a long history of epistemic inquiry. From Pyrrhonism to Academic Scepticism. A "theory" broadly speaking is an attempt to explain the facts. Absolute Certainty is a fallacy so a theory is not "Absolute Truth". In Science a theory is an explanation which fits the facts, has been peer-reviewed and accepted as an adequate account. Much different than colloquial usage.

  • NERD

  • There's always going to a missing link. Every time a intermediate fossil is found, there are two more missing links either side and so on.

  • planexzeropoint- You, sir, are a fool. I may be a fool as well, but at least I'm not as closed minded.

    Just because goats never flew, doesn't mean other lifeforms didn't evolve to suit the environment. Your logic is arbitrary, not to mention annoying.

  • that whole deathbed thing is an ugly lie, no proof to back it up, it was made by creationists.

  • repost?

  • yep

  • Today is 149th anniversary of the publication of "on the origin of species"

  • yay for rocket boom!

    weird that this one has come out now!

  • Hahaha that was so abstract. XD

    I liked the part about the jeans and how the jeans turned into chromosomes. Very good visual teaching there.

  • Isn't this an old video. And wasn't Darwin born in February?

  • I think she's reffering to the publication of Origin Of Species.

  • This episode was online already, wasn't it?

  • It's a clone.

  • Tuesday, February 12th?!?!?!? Today is Sunday, November 23rd! Anyway, it's a good installment of RocketBoom! Five stars!

  • Happy Birthday

  • That was a great explanation! You should be a teacher!

  • i love rocketboom

  • 1st! Only joking. Happy Birthday Charles.

Loading...
0 / 00Unsaved Playlist Return to active list
    1. Your queue is empty. Add videos to your queue using this button:
      or sign in to load a different list.
    Loading...Loading...Saving...
    • Clear all videos from this list
    • Learn more